Let's hope you don't get cancer. It's a terrible way to go. My dad had it also but neither me nor my 14.5 years older sister has not contracted it so far. I'll turn 65 next month and being barraged by companies wanting to sell me Medicare supplement insurance. The commercial coverage I've had the last 11 years is about the same as Medicare Part A. So why should I bother? But the rest of society is programmed into believing that you must have all this extra coverage. Plus putting a lot of unnatural chemicals in your body is a good thing. You know the stuff that has a big page full of disclaimers and side effects on the bottle or pamphlet you get. And people here worry about some metals in ayurvedic treatments.
The neighbor told me the trip of her husband via ambulance only cost them $200 with their HMO coverage and it would have been $20K otherwise. What! How can they get away with that? Well actually I've heard of cases that when presented with such a bill the person just offered to pay them a little more than what insurance would have and their portion and it was accepted. This is a nation of greed and scams. Another thing is not to be afraid of death. As long as you are afraid of death for profit health care has you by the balls. On 11/03/2011 04:00 PM, obbajeeba wrote: > Yee haw for allergies! Bring em on! > > I and another family member have had a theory and I forgot how and where we > came up with it at this moment. People who tend not to get sick, appear more > prone to cancers. I thought about my family members who always claimed of not > getting head colds, allergies, etc., and each one of them had gotten cancer > in their years. There is something to that. I am sure. > Now if I get cancer, that whole theory goes out the window. LOL > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu<noozguru@...> wrote: >> I haven't kept up on it but back in the late 1970s I looked into the >> cancer work of Dr. Kelly and what is now HealthExcel and run by a >> former TM teacher Bill Wolcott. They divided cancers groups by hard >> tumor and soft tumors. Different body types were prone to getting one >> or the other. >> >> BTW, another doctor I went to in the 1980s who was not at all into >> alternative medicine told me that the allergist he shared an office with >> once remarked that almost none of his patients ever got cancer. He >> believed that was because people who have allergies have strong immune >> systems since allergies are often the reaction of the immune system on >> some allergen. Hence the strong immune system got rid of cancer cells >> before they could do anything. >> >> >> On 11/03/2011 03:06 PM, obbajeeba wrote: >>> It is a little bit more complicated than that. Food turns to glucose. Most >>> cancer patients start to lose weight, wasting disease, so one would think >>> that in itself would stop the cancer or slow it down. >>> Anti angiogenisis, seems to be a promising exploration, yet not anywhere >>> near where it should be, a cure. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angiogenesis >>> >>> Cancer sucks. >>> >>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "johnt"<johnlasher20002000@> wrote: >>>> Most cancers require glucose to survive. Since a ketogenic diet relys on >>>> fat metabolism rather than glucose metabolism (glycogenesis vs. >>>> lipogenesis) many cancer tumors starve to death or have their growth >>>> dramatically slowed. Lot's of research. A very low carb diet can produce >>>> this and can be vegetarian or even vegan if so desired.Google `Flexi >>>> Diet' . >>>> >>>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, obbajeeba<no_reply@> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu<noozguru@> wrote: >>>>>> On 11/02/2011 06:19 PM, Alex Stanley wrote: >>>>>>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu<noozguru@> wrote: >>>>>>>> Interesting article on Steve Jobs dietary quirks (not too unlike some >>>>>>>> quirks people have here) and comments by nutritional experts: >>>>>>>> http://bodyodd.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/02/8598251-the-strange-eating-habits-of-steve-jobs >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Lots and lots of speculation going on. The fruitarians are saying he'd >>>>>>> have never gotten cancer if only he'd stuck to fruitarianism all along. >>>>>>> The low-carbers think he should have ditched all the cancer-food carbs >>>>>>> and switched to a ketogenic diet. I'd side with the ketogenic diet over >>>>>>> fruitarianism, but I really think he should have jumped at the chance >>>>>>> to have that rare, survivable fucker cut out of his body early, when he >>>>>>> had the chance. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> A friend of mine in FF was diagnosed with ovarian cancer early enough >>>>>>> that she would have likely survived had she gotten surgery. But, she >>>>>>> opted for a yearlong death spiral, doing all sorts of new-age >>>>>>> alternative nonsense. Honestly, I think she really just wanted outta >>>>>>> here. >>>>>> My brother was never into anything new age but came down with colon >>>>>> cancer at age 52. The last few months he was into trying anything but I >>>>>> knew it was too late. Now if he had just eaten the diet he was eating >>>>>> in his last few months he may have never gotten cancer in the first >>>>>> place. >>>>>> >>>>> It is not only diet that is causing cancer. Lot's of vegetarians die of >>>>> cancer. >>>>> >>>>> In the seventies, I remember science teachers saying cancers would be >>>>> creeping up in the next twenty years or later because of all the nuclear >>>>> testings and bombs dropped, etc. I buy this story before the belief that >>>>> diet causes cancer. >>>>> Although, I do believe relief can be had for any ailment with a healthy >>>>> diet and make life feel a bit better. Diet takes the blame out of all the >>>>> government testings, thereby liability is passed to the individual >>>>> exposed to all the crap. >>>>> Another theory is our lives have changed so much due to work, >>>>> environment, moving around etc., that the body is trying to adapt by >>>>> evolving at an accelerated rate (evolution gone haywire), increasing the >>>>> incidences of cancer tumors, (they do grow their own supply of veins). >>>>> Somewhere, there is an article on the net supporting the later and it >>>>> made sense. it is not a mystery black mass like in one of the Hollywood >>>>> movies I saw. lol... >>>>> I can't find it right now. >>>>> >>> > >
